Friday, June 30, 2006

It appears as if JournalMoveAcrossTheStreetGate2006 has been s*ttled. (After the Prof Marts final on which 2/4 questions were on s*ttlem*nts, I can't bear to spell out the word in full ever again, fyi). One journal sent an email to its members saying:

Deans M and S informed us yesterday afternoon that our Journal office will not be moved to the 33 West 60th building. Law Review agreed to give up their staff office in exchange for the LLM conference room; with that, the administration believes it will have enough space to accommodate its needs for the 2006-2007 year.

It must be nice for them to stay on the "Garden Level." The flora and fauna is just amazing this time of year. The email went on:

We are fairly confident that the volume of impassioned and articulate e-mails, phone calls, and letters from staff, editors, and alumni are largely responsible for affecting the administration's decision-making and for helping them to understand the very real consequences of such a move on the ULJ, ILJ, and Law Review.

It's just like Scalia said in Lawrence. First you allow the admin to move the Journals across the street, next thing you know we have polygamists running around and 1Ls marrying sheep. Good thing the alums let the Dean know that.

Speaking of polygamy, engagement fever has hit Section 5. There apparently have been four rocks exchanged this summer so far, and it's not even July. FishWatch's "Love Lives" section will have all the details after the holiday, including a special interview with jeweler Neil Lane on what rings are hot at F.U. right now.

Have a wonderful holiday weekend y'all! For me, freedom means watching hours and hours of TV and movies, including Superman, Strangers With Candy, Devil Wears Prada, World Cup, and Wimbledon (yes, I too can watch sports, especially if they involve peoplewholooklikethis).

Thursday, June 29, 2006

So after putting together a pretty mediocre brief, my partner and I were not too excited to pick up our opponents' brief in the event that it kicked ass. That being said, we still expected said opponents' brief to be there.

However, when my partner arrived at F.U. yesterday morning to get the brief from the box, it was decidedly not among the what I am sure are brilliant and insightful legal arguments. He talked to the moo court peeps and they said to come back later (cause we LOVE going to F.U. Law as often as we can in summer, apparently). He goes back in the afternoon, and...nada. He then sends the editors a snarky e-mail claiming grave injustice, and leaves the country (cause the July 4th fireworks are just TO DIE FOR in Amsterdam), and I get an email from the Moo Court peeps saying I should come in the evening and it would be there. I get home last night, ready to order take out and watch "So You Think You Can Dance," but instead put on my running shorts and shoes, and jog across the park to good old F.U. I show up to the Moo Court office, sweat glistening and hair tussled (and wheezing since I forgot to take my inhaler and my Claritin), and find that the BRIEF IS NOT IN THERE (I looked twice!). The girl in the office says, "Oh yeah, just email the editors, I guess." OK. (Cause it's not like everyone made 8 copies or anything).

So I send another snarky email to the Moo Court peeps, and then email the actual opponents telling them of our trials and tribulations, and asking them to just email us a copy so I don't have to do anymore exercise, g*d forbid. I really hope we get it soon, cause a four day Independence Day weekend without a brief to read is just UN-American.

Also, the dreaded (admit it, you called them to see when they were coming out) class standings email came yesterday:

Dear Members of the Classes of 2007, 2008 and 2009,

The Registrars [sic] Office has just released the following information regarding approximate or estimated class standings for the 2005-2006 academic year. [F.U. Law] does not have official class standings, therefore the term "approximate"or "estimated" must always be used in conjunction with these figures if you reference them on your resume.

By saying F.U. "does not having official class standings," do they mean what my High School meant when they said they didn't officially rank us? Meaning that they really did rank, they just didn't tell you unless you kissed up to the guidance counselor and asked him? I am guessing that's the case, since we heard a rumor the other day that a certain firm asks Registrar Ken for the top 12 kids in the class and sends them an email inviting them to submit a resume...and then sends them a letter saying "we aren't going to hire you, why did you bother?"

Also, why are these only "approximate" and "estimated" standings? Is it like the Nielsen ratings? Do they only look at one section as a sample and then make the "approximations" and "estimates" based on that? I really hope they didn't use Section 5, cause we are one crazy sample population if I ever saw one.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

I rarely check my F.U. inbox because there are just so many times you can be reminded about an updated list of on-campus interviewers who aren't going to hire you.

But below are some selected emails from our F.U. inboxes that are surprisingly not from Career Planning. Anyone else notice a trend here? If you ask me, it looks as if YSummer2K6FU is coming, just as Nostradamus predicted. I even read somewhere that he once predicted that F.U. Law's "Simplicity" will forget to upload resumes in the fall of the 6th year after two millenia. OMG THAT'S THIS YEAR!!!

Friday, June 23, 2006

So last night my (former) roommate (*tear) and I had the following exchange over IM while I was at work. (Yes I IM at work).

[redacted]: What time shall we meet for dinner?FishWatch: How about 9:00 in the East Village?[redacted]: Ok.[redacted]: Or we could go hear Christina Aguilera perform at a party.FishWatch: Um...Let me think about that.

Christina was amazing. She looked hawt and sang her little heart out. For a full recap click here.

The best part of the evening was not when X-tina saw me singing along to Beautiful and winked at me, (i died), but rather, when I met TIM GUNN and told him how excited I was about Season 3!! He told me he would talk to the Moo Court peeps and make sure I was free that night. Thanks Tim! Carry On!

Thursday, June 22, 2006

The below e-mail made it into our inbox a few days ago, but it basically took me until today to finish reading it. That's how long it is. It's a response from Dean T to a student who complained about the impending move of the Journal Offices to West 60th Street. The situation may have been resolved by now, but FishWatch has stopped providing up to the minute news service on all things F.U. Law since readership is now only me, CH, and my 3 non-law school friends who pretend to think this blog is funny.

Reading the e-mail over, I have realized that I am swayed by anything really, and have very few convictions. Hand me a DOJ memo on Wiretapping and I am SOLD. Hand me an ACLU one against, and I am mad as hell. Hand me an US Weekly about how sad Jen is, I put on my "Team Aniston" shirt and pay 10 bucks to see "Rumor Has It." Put Angie on Anderson Cooper and "Team Jolie" comes out of the laundry basket and I adopt an orphan with no arms.

So, not that I really cared before, but now Dean T has convinced me that moving the Journals is best. Cause if Stanford and Harvard do it this way, who are we to question such wisdom?

Here is the email in full:

Dear [Redacted],

I appreciate receiving your views about the proposed move of the Law Review, the ILJ, and the ULJ to West 60th Street. I am, at this point, still thinking through the question whether the journals will be moved, but I am writing to let you know why the move is under serious consideration.

As anyone who knows [F.U.] Law School recognizes, we face serious space difficulties. Other top schools have at least twice as much space per student as we do. We need a new building and the planning for one is actively underway. My hope is that we will have a new law school building in the near future and that all components of the school will then be housed in one building.

In the meantime, we must make temporary arrangements. Our space has become so inadequate that we cannot make obvious and needed improvements to current programs and cannot find space for new ones. Generous alumni have given us the funding to expand our Crowley Program in International Human Rights and to create the John Feerick Center for Law and Social Justice. The Crowley expansion will give students the opportunity to engage in a clinic in human rights law, learning under experts in the area. The Feerick Center will give students the opportunity to work under Dean Feerick's invaluable mentorship on some of the most vexing problems affecting our larger society -- school financing and family homelessness among them. We also need space for other programs. As just one example, we have hired a new Assistant Dean to run and expand our international and LL.M. programs. Put simply, our need for space is not theoretical; these programs need space in which to begin operation in the Fall.

This is why the availability of additional space at 33 West 60th comes as welcome relief. As you know, 33 West 60th has housed major law school programs for years. A number of faculty members have offices there. Our Clinic Program occupies the third floor. Dean Feerick and the Crowley Program are both on the second floor. However, we have used up every scrap of space available to us there. We need space for additional faculty, the Clinic Program is bursting at the seams and the Crowley and Feerick Programs are about to launch. The additional space on the 9th floor at 33 West 60th will allow us to address each of these issues.

The needs of the Feerick and Crowley Programs require that we move the Admissions and Financial Aid Offices from the 2nd floor at 33 West 60th. As we go through the inconvenience of moving these offices, we have the opportunity to create an Enrollment Services unit, consisting of the Registrar's Office, the Admissions Office and Financial Aid. Combining these operations will improve efficiency. Each of these offices works on a different time cycle. Thus, the Registrar's Office is extraordinarily busy at times of the year when the Admissions Office and Financial Aid are not as busy. By bringing these offices together and by cross-training staff, we would be able to use our resources to address each office's crunch times more effectively. Our objective here would be simple: we would seek to meet the long-standing, and oft-repeated, request of students and student leaders for better service in these areas.

We have, of course, considered housing the new Enrollment Services Office in the new space at 33 West 60th. Such a plan has significant costs. It would require all 1400 of our students, including evening students with simple questions, to leave the main building and go over to West 60th Street to seek information from the Registrar. It would also make some of the operations of the Registrar's Office -- such as the administration of exams and the provision of direct services to students and faculty -- much more difficult. On the other hand, bringing the Enrollment Services Office into the main building would have significant benefits. All key student services would then be available to students on the garden level. Administrative offices that need to coordinate closely would be located together. For example, the Financial Aid and Registrar's Office need to work closely with the Office of the Dean of Students on the entry of incoming classes, the graduation of outgoing classes and the provision of services to students. That work could be done much more effectively if the offices were near one another. Finally, there are obvious benefits to the school in having the Admissions Office in the main building. That key office originally was moved to the 33 West 60th building with great reluctance and at great cost. Bringing it back into the main building would help us have a more effective way of recruiting potential students and serving admitted students.

This brings us to the point where we consider housing Enrollment Services in the space now occupied by the three journals in the main law school building, and it is against this context that I ask you to view the proposal to move the journals. We are forced to make decisions about space that are less than perfect, but such decisions must be made.

I recognize the benefits of having the journals in the main building. The journals are a hub of student life and have created vibrant communities on the garden level. The creation of community is one of our core values, and I take very seriously anything that might weaken the sense of community. I know that moves are disruptive and that there are short term costs that must be accounted for when considering them. Our experience with 33 West 60th Street shows that it is fully possible to foster community in that building. The Clinic, which is housed on the second floor, is one of the programs that is used most intensively by large numbers of students. It has thrived at West 60th and has thrived to a far greater extent than would have been possible if it had clung to its inadequate space in the main building. Our Crowley and Feerick Programs have similarly thrived there and are about to expand. 33 West 60th Street is part of the law school and is also a hub of student life. Housing the journals there would make that space even more vibrant.

Other urban law schools - ones with far more space than we have - have already decided that journals can be housed in buildings that do not contain the main classrooms. This is the case at the other leading schools in Manhattan, where the law reviews at Columbia and NYU are not in the main building. The Harvard Law Review and the George Washington Law Review are not in the main classroom building either. Even Stanford - which is not an urban campus - is moving one of its journals out of the classroom building.

The experience at other schools makes clear that journals do not need to be in main classroom buildings to thrive. They can be located nearby in other law school space without compromising the quality of their product. Under the plan I am considering, the journals would receive more space and more varied types of space at 33 West 60th Street than they currently have. The space itself is of a higher quality than the journals now have.

We are still working on the question of what hours the West 60th Street building will be open, but the move will only occur if an appropriate arrangement on hours can be set up. The journals are one of the great strengths of the law school, and I would not move them if the move would weaken that strength.

I note that as a community, we have managed to live remarkably well together in seriously inadequate space. I am keenly aware of the relationship between space and community. Our space needs are such that I fear our ability to foster community may be weakened if our activities become much more compressed. For my part, over the past year, I have asked that we scour the space in the Law School to find ways to give our student community a little breathing space. As a result, when students return to school in the Fall, they will find couches and comfortable chairs that will be available for them in the Atrium during times that the space is not being used for events. We will have benches spread throughout the school to give students a place to sit between classes. We will have more couches and chairs available in the cafeteria. We are also undertaking construction to increase classroom space and have gone so far as to remove an old vault from the garden level to create a small room that will give us space for meetings.

The question about 33 West 60th at this point is what makes sense for the community as a whole, weighing costs against benefits. I have asked those of you who will be affected by this proposal to join me in figuring out how to make it work best if it is adopted. I have made similar requests of those who would be affected by other proposals we have been developing and considering. I am grateful to those of you who have made suggestions that would improve a move for the journals. We have already incorporated some of the suggestions into our planning. Such input helps a great deal because it allows me to identify accurately the true institutional costs of adopting each of the alternatives before me. I am committed to making whatever move does come to pass as easy as possible. If we implement the move of the journals, we will work closely with editors and staff to ensure that their work is disrupted as little as humanly possible.

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

So the conflict notification deadline was Monday at 8:00PM for Moo Court oral argument rounds, and I just realized that I made a serious omission that is going to have massive repercussions for everyone involved:

I FORGOT TO LIST JULY 12th AS A CONFLICT AND IT IS THE PREMIER OF PROJECT RUNWAY!!!!! If I get scheduled to debate some nerd-tastic topic (that I voluntarily signed up to do, keep in mind) on the most anticipated night of the summer, I will be more angry than Kara after a sizzler, if you know what I mean.

Moo Court G*ds, if you are reading this slowly dying blog...please, please don't schedule me on July 12th for round two of Dorkitude 2006.

But if I do get scheduled that day, rest assure my oral arguments will be on the differing standards of review employed by Nina Garcia, Fashion Director Elle Magazine, and Michael Kors, Designer, American Jet Set Fashion, and which standard the Court should adopt to settle the jurisprudence on this matter once and for all.

Friday, June 16, 2006

Today at 10:43 I realized that my Externship Seminar Class 2 Writing Assignments were due at noon, which meant I had to put aside actual work I was doing FOR my externship, to write ABOUT my externship. Very meta I think. Or ironic. I don't know. Anyway, first I had to answer the following questions on "Supervision:"

Consider an assignment that you received from your fieldwork supervisor. (1) What were you told about it? (2) What were to not told initially but discovered later that you needed to know? (3) What should you have asked that you didn't? (4) Did things come up that couldn't be anticipated? (5) How did you handle unanticipated questions?

My answer:

(1) I was told to write a memo and do it fast. (2) That if I found out I had to answer silly questions for a silly class, I should do the memo instead. (3) I should have asked if my supervisor could write me a note getting me out of externship seminar class on Monday. (4) Yes. See above 1-5. (5) By writing obnoxious answers to them on my blog.

Also, we have to discuss an ethical dilemma discussion we were supposed to have with our supervisor. Since my supervisor is out all morning, I think I am going to have to write about the ethical dilemma of making up the ethical dilemma discussion. Very meta. Or ironic. I don't know.

Monday, June 12, 2006

For those of you not in the know, this meeting is about how to best pick the 35 firms you have to pick for early interview week this August. As we heard from our friends who attended last night, it is a COMPLETE waste of time, but FishWatch will nevertheless be liveblogging throughout, since none of you f*ckers did yesterday.

7:55 - It's like world cup soccer outside, the crowd is getting restless.

8:06 - He just used "CPC" and "useful" in the same sentence. This meeting has already lost credibility.

8:07 - Start ranking as soon as you get your grades! And if your grades suck? DON'T BOTHER!

8:07 - There are no safeties and reaches, go in your group. Someone asked what this meant, I really don't think he answered it, but I think he thinks he did. In language you can understand: "Harvard" ain't going to happen. Also, as Jeri Blank once said, "Go with what you know."

8:08 - Category I firms are for the top 10%. If you are in the top 11%, you are not in the top 10%. Huh. Category II firms are for the top 1/3 of the class. And category III firms are for the top 1/2 of the class. And if you are in the bottom 1/2? Well then you get the thanks of everyone IN the top 1/2 for just existing and taking up the necessary space.

8:10 - Greeter program - put on a happy face, walk the attorney to the interview room, and BEG for an interview. They may tell you to come back for an interview. More likely they will send you to get a diet coke and a panini.

8:13 - Don't overbid: "Like don't do 10, 10 and 15, cause you can only do 35." Again, more credibility lost.

8:16 - SKADDEN GOT THE BOOT!!!! They are Category 2! Note this is only 3 shy of Hurricane Katrina.

8:22 - This thing is dunzo. On all of our minds is, why couldn't they have just added a category column on the spreadsheet they sent us, since that is all they said?

Friday, June 09, 2006

A source sent us some shocking news this morning in a rather long email. I have briefed it for you below.

Facts: The administration wants to move the ULJ, ILJ, and Law Review offices to a new space on the 9th floor of 33 West 60th Street and plans to fill their current offices with new offices for the Registrar, Student Affairs, and Career Services.

Holding: The administration is going to move the ULJ, ILJ, and Law Review offices to a new space on the 9th floor of 33 West 60th Street and plans to fill their current offices with new offices for the Registrar, Student Affairs, and Career Services.

Rationale: The administration claims that they need the Registrar, Student Affairs, and Careers Services to occupy a central physical location to have increased access to students. They also claim that these offices need to communicate with one another.

I am a little confused. Aren't the current Career Services offices and Student Affairs Office 15 feet away from the journal offices right now? So they are going to move them 15 feet down the hall? And has anyone figured out what exactly Student Affairs does? They realize we still can't access the facebook from off-campus, and that no one has any time for movies, right? Also, can't these offices just communicate by email? Or a blog? Or walking 15 feet down the hall? Also, isn't this whole building going to get knocked down in like 2 years, so why waste people's time?

Most importantly, how are we going to impress the new hot 1Ls if they don't see us going in and out of the Law Review office all day long, and they can't see us sitting in there pretending to review the law? This, I think, should be a central argument in the Journals' brief, and will be the cornerstone of FishWatch's amicus brief that will be filed later today.

As one ULJ editor has stated in an e-mail to members, "[t]he space at 33 West 60th is not horrible, but is also not great." Powerful words that should inspire us all to take action against this travesty.

Monday, June 05, 2006

Believe it or not, I am writing from the Caf at F.U. School of Law! I just emerged from the two hour "externship seminar" I have to take to get credit for my internship, which I think many of you are also taking, so we should share in the misery. This may be the biggest bunch of fluff I have ever witnessed. I think the most telling phrases of the course so far have been "fill out your 'Learning Agenda' that will help you articulate your goals for the summer" and "We are going to be sharing our experiences a lot."

My goals were as follows:

1. Impress my fellow interns and co-workers with my wit, charm, and good looks.2. Impress my fellow interns and co-workers with my sense of style (a.k.a. dress for the verdict I want).3. Keep up with the blog at all costs.4. Find a husband who is about ready to transition to the private sector.

I had to change them though once I realized we had to get our supervisors to sign them and hand them in. Then they became the standard, "Improve my _________ skills."

Prof S also made us all explain why we decided to come to law school, and I swear what we said was the exact opposite of what was being said as little as two weeks ago. I even found myself saying "I had a great time this year," and "I look forward to learning more about the law." It must be the new red umbrellas on the "patio" outside the caf that make this place feel more like a Caribbean resort and less like a public high school.

In other news, I received an ID today, so I did numerous shots of espresso just to celebrate, and felt free to use the bathroom as many times as I needed.

Friday, June 02, 2006

So I have been at work for a week now, and still don't have an ID Card somehow (clearly, I am not working for the private sector). Luckily the security guard downstairs is from my hometown, so he lets me in, but when I get to my floor, I have to wait by the "DON'T LET ANYONE WITHOUT ID IN" sign for someone to come out or go in and explain to them that I am the intern sans ID, at which point they look at me, look at the sign, then look at me again. I give them my best smile, and so far, it has worked all but one time.

The worst part about this situation is that the bathroom is back outside the FishWatch proof door. This means I have to borrow an ID from someone, telling them that I need to go the bathroom, which is awkward, because then they will know for how long I am in the bathroom. Also, I can tell in eyes of the women on the floor that they simply do not want their IDs going into the men's room. Alternatively, I have lied and said I am going out to get a snack, but then the ID holder asks for something, so then I actually have to go out and get a snack at a time when I am trying to get my body back in shape in case someone invites me out to the Hamptons and/or his bedroom.

The solution has been to minimize my exits and entrances. I have cut out all caffeinated beverages (which means no props around when I tell the icedcoffeemeltdown story), and luckily the water cooler on the floor is for "Paying Water Club Members Only" (according to the sign), so I can't even hydrate at all. I leave only for lunch (going to the bathroom on the way out) and then make an intern from a different floor come and let me in after lunch so I don't have to bother my boss. Yesterday, one intern (you know who you are KB) refused to come up and let me in, so I had to call the boss who is just getting tired of this whole situation.

You would think the simple answer would be to just get an ID, but I have tried people, I really have, and it doesn't appear that I will be getting one anytime soon.

The bigger issue is that I accidentally drank some water at lunch and now I have to pee. Does this mean I have to leave for the day?

Thursday, June 01, 2006

It is t-minus 2 hours and 15min til the Moo Court meeting begins, and I know you all are just ITCHIN' to get your hands on the Mulligan Competition materials. I, for one, cannot say "Mulligan" unless it's in a thick Irish accent with a Guinness in hand. Fitting, since that is how I anticipate working on this thing -- with one hand trying to get my broken laptop to work, and the other setting up the Irish car bombs.

Does anyone else feel like they have been living hard the past month or so? It's kind of like being a rock star without the rock, or the star, or the drugs, or the sex. I mean, we finish finals, have to do this writing comp thing, then move out of our apts, then start work, and now write briefs for this thing? I don't really know why I opt to do all of these voluntary things, but part of me feels that the "if everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you?" message was lost on me those many years ago.

Lastly, I was sitting in the back of a courtroom today when a very good looking girl up near the judge looked my way and stared at me for a minute or so. I couldn't help but think that I had somehow found some hetero mojo, and that women might just think I am a metrosexual or something, and therefore men would find me hotter since they might think I was straight. Then the judge introduced her as his summer intern and I realized we went to high school together, so in reality, she was just asking herself, "was he really that gay in high school?" Well, I don't think so, but to tell you the truth, around Lindsay Lohan I queened it up, since I knew making her my hag was the best option for getting to the top. Clearly, that plan worked.